Expander Gate/Dynamics III vs Drawmer Dynamics

[DaveSB]

Thanks for all the info-I guess I should look on Ebay for a used Drawmer Dynamics plugin.
I thought Expander Gate/Dynamics III must be as good as EQIII since it has the same GUI --I assumed the code base must be the same!!

[matt-o-]

EQ III is certainly an improvement.

But the EQ III has some flaws as well. I once needed a recorded LFE track to be filtered properly, and I first tried an EQ III (1B), but noticed some grittle and distortion in the filtered track. I tried the McDSP FilterBank LoPass in comparison, and now the Lows were perfectly clean and sinoidal, means undistorted or -grittled ;-). That experience was the seed for some doubt about the EQ III.

my 0.02
matthias

[Jeff D.]

I have the Drawmer and the Digi Dyn III. If you're only useing the gate I like the Digi Dyn III better. The lookahead feature saves transients that are shaved off by the Drawmer (to be fair, the real hardware Drawmer gate shaves off transients in the same way as the plugin. If you like the Drawmer hardware you'll like the plugin). The compressor in the Drawmer is pretty cool.

[DaveSB]

Does McDSP have a good expander gate in a product like ChannelG or ML4000
Any comments on the McDSP

[iamnerdyrocker]

I cannot stop using the DYNIII Expander/Gate, Desser, and even the Compressor. Granted, I am not doing a lot of 'clean' work. Most of my stuff is rock n roll so I dont mind the distortion.
I use the compressor the most on the tom tracks. It seems to be a good fit for me.

YMMV I guess.